Rhetorical Analysis Alex Taylor

The author of the article is Suzanne Labarre. This probably isn't her first article and she might be a scientist so that makes her argument believable. The intended audience are the people who are interested in science and who probably use social media and computers to get their information. The intended audiences background are people who are familiar with the site and who are educated. If the site is usually right and factual people will more than likely believe it.
It's more of an explicit thesis, the first sentence starts off by saying that comments are bad for science. They bring up past experiences and a study that was done which supported their thesis. They have different paragraphs but they don't have headings. The new sections suggest a new idea which is different than the one before.They use past experiences and a study that was done as evidence to support their thesis. There are no outside sources. The author doesn't use any unnecessary words and sticks to the topic which gives her credibility. The author has a scholarly tone. There is one section of text which sticks out and she also has a section where she calls the opposite side words like boorish. kind of an ordinary informal design.
It was published Sept 24, 2013, if it was an older source people might not think it was relevant today. It is a .com site which means it might not be all that credible.
What prompted her to write may be that people were being swayed on how they thought based on the comments and she wanted to shed some light on why that is. It can help people decide whether or not to read comments and whether to base their decisions on the comments, also whether to respond to trolls.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License